LAWS(BOM)-2011-9-139

RATTAN SUKA LILKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On September 23, 2011
RATTAN SUKA LILKE Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant was the original Accused No.2 in Sessions Case No.211 of 2002, which was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik. THE learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant of an offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also of an offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. THE learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced the Appellant to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- with respect to the offence punishable under Section 366 of the IPC, read with Section 34 of the IPC, and R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.500/- with respect to the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the IPC. THE Appellant, being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, has appealed to this Court.

(2.) I have heard Mr. M.S. Karnik, the learned Counsel for the Appellant, and Smt. V.R. Bhosale, the learned APP for the Respondent-State. I have been taken through the evidence adduced before the trial Court. I have also been taken through the impugned judgment and order.

(3.) It is contended by Mr. M.S. Karnik, the learned Counsel for the Appellant, that there was no evidence to hold the Appellant guilty. He also submitted that, even as regards the original Accused No.1, there was no satisfactory evidence. He submitted that the evidence on record at-least creates a doubt that the prosecutrix was probably a consenting party, and that the original Accused No.1 was also entitled for the benefit of such doubt. He further submitted that, in any case, there was no basis for holding the Appellant guilty of the alleged offences.